Key result
LBBAP maintains chronic activation of automated capture and sensing algorithms in ~94% of devices.
Why the study?
Despite the increasing adoption of left bundle branch area pacing in pacemaker patients, detailed data on pacemaker performance and programming remains limited.
Does left bundle branch area pacing with current pacemakers provide reliable pacing and sensing performance in real-world practice?
Population
2,894 VR, DR, and CRT-P devices connected to leads implanted in the LBBA
Design
Retrospective analysis of device data
Follow-up
6-month (±14 days)
Authors
Loading...
LBBA pacing burden varies by indication; hypothesis-generating for tailored programming but leaves open prospective validation.
Observational (n=2,894)
Does left bundle branch area pacing with current pacemakers provide reliable pacing and sensing performance in real-world practice?
Commercially available pacemakers demonstrate reliable chronic pacing and sensing performance when used for left bundle branch area pacing in real-world settings.
Sprowls et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Pacemaker indication (AV block, atrial fibrillation, sinus node dysfunction) (n=2,894). Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) was evaluated on Pacing capture threshold (PCT) and sensed R-wave amplitude (RWA). In 2,894 devices used for left bundle branch area pacing, ventricular AutoCapture, CapConfirm, and AutoSense remained chronically activated in 93.5%, 97.0%, and 96.5% of devices, respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: